Back to Top
arrow17 Comments
  1. Paul
    Jul 14 - 7:35 am

    As long as an individual’s SSAN is included this is just an open door to Internet hacking and identity theft. It’s time that SSAN’s be relegated to their original intent – collect and pay taxes and benefits. Any use of a SSAN for ANY other purpose must be made completely illegal.

    Assign a medical ID to all eligible individuals. NO SSAN’s.

    • David Tao
      Jul 15 - 11:53 am

      The rules don’t say anything about SSNs. They specifically do NOT include it, despite some commenter suggesting that they do.

  2. Jeremy Engdahl-Johnson
    Jul 14 - 5:40 pm

    Federal funding may be encouraging a move toward EHR, but there’s more to it than just installing systems. How can healthcare data pooling lead to a better system? More at

  3. A Cavale
    Jul 14 - 7:58 pm

    Having invested in an electronic medical office for over 8 years, and having lived the trials and tribulations of operating it without a single dollar of extra reimbursement for our efforts, I can say that this can only be successful if we as providers are allowed to utilize our strengths to negotiate appropriate reimbursement from public and private payers. Anything short of this is simply lip service, and will only serve to propagate the myth that health IT pays for itself. I am still looking for an opportunity to compete in true free market conditions, that are non-existent under the current price-fixed environment.

  4. Sree
    Jul 15 - 12:50 am

    The Meaningful Use Final Rule is a turning point in American healthcare. It will go a long way in improving healthcare for millions of people. I’m sure after a few years, statistics will show that meaningful use of EHRs have helped us achieve better patient care and improve the health and well being of the common man.

    Providers might be facing problems implementing EHR systems, but in the long run EHRs are only going to make the provider’s life easier, save his/her time. This means doctors will have more time for research and advanced studies which again is good for healthcare.

    • Jason
      Aug 19 - 7:50 pm

      Agreed. EHR systems are not going away. There has to be a cost benefit analysis showing positive outcomes. If the cost can be recovered quickly then do it.

  5. Adam Bates
    Jul 16 - 12:53 pm

    When the PC and accounting / ERP software was introduced to private industry there was no government incentive, yet very few successful companies today rely on paper ledgers to run their businesses.

    Better information translates to higher quality patient care, but arbitrary implementation dates, conflicting and confusing mandates, and the tantalizing stimulus money only serve to distract providers from their real responsibility: providing quality patient care.

    If an EMR system truly saves money, physicians and providers will implement it to save money. If an EMR system improves patient care, then a physician / provider focused on the best interest of their patients will implement it.

    I have personally worked with lots of great physicians that still use paper charts and provide outstanding patient care. I have worked with physicians on EMR that simply care about the money.

    Hopefully now that meaningful use and some of the other gray areas are being resolved, the focus will return to evaluating the effectiveness of a physician and monitoring the quality of patient care, regardless of the medium on which the patient’s information is maintained.

    • Sara
      Aug 19 - 2:35 am

      Totally agree. Private industry has had to adopt ERP systems and control security over their client’s records. Why can’t the medical industry do the same with government stimulus.

  6. AMH in Ohio
    Jul 22 - 10:15 am

    So long as records can easily be shared, the this should help health care management. My concern is with the HIPPA privacy rules that institutions will be unwilling to pass information along freely to one another.

  7. Martin
    Jul 24 - 8:44 pm

    We have had a long battle in the UK to get some form of digital or e-records in place. It is taking time but evetually it will be worth it. Digital medical records make it possible to improve quality of patient care in numerous ways. For example, doctors can make better clinical decisions with ready access to full medical histories for their patients—including new patients, returning patients, or patients who see several different providers.

  8. Cavele
    Jul 30 - 12:47 pm

    I would agree that the electronic health record systems is definitely a step in the right direction. However, as with most systems it will only be as good as the people who use it on a daily basis. My main concern with this system is patient privacy and the safeguarding of patient records. But then again storing patient information in filing cabinets is not that safe and efficient either. I’m all for giving this new technology a try.

  9. andrea harangozo, m.d.
    Aug 03 - 5:08 pm

    Where are the rules allowing for clinical applicability of the system we establish? Patient oriented information technology rather than information technology for technology’s sake! With the 11% cut in medicare fees, lack of funding of electronic medical records for ALL physicians, 20-30 % medicare or medicaid, or not, inappropriate audits of physicians with the assertation you are guilty of fraud unless you documented the lack of the negative finding, why should any private physician or physician group be inclined to implement these systems? Especially as motivated independent physician groups, previously unfunded remain ignored, those already funded get more, and the common language and definitions remain lacking making the physician the default common denominator to make propriatery systems work, without paying for the trouble. Information exchange between big systems is not the point. exchange between providers of healthcare, healthcare professional to professional is the point! not hospital to hospital! It’s no longer worth while and until those in power start listening, we remain unlikely to succeed. Sincerely, a previously hopeful, now doubtful believer in t implementation of our information systems…please start paying attention and listen.

  10. Bali
    Aug 19 - 7:45 pm

    Implementing IT solutions is not easy nor cheap. I have implemented many systems myself and often the benefits are not realised immediately- it takes time. I see time and time again many businesses spending to much money on IT systems to automate simple tasks that do not need to be automated. A cost benefit analysis must show a net benefit to the organisation otherwise it will only unnecessarily increase medical serving costs.

  11. The Power Saver Guy
    Aug 27 - 1:00 pm

    I certainly agree that the use of electronic health records is indeed good as it can help save a lot of time for both medical professionals and patients. Also, electronic records can save storage cost and provide a more reliable but rich source of information for health care providers. Thus, cross-checking of similar records can be practiced to allow professionals to come up with more effective cures for certain ailments.

    However, the concern is that electronic records are more vulnerable to hackers. This directly threatens the privacy of patients and can be disastrous if used for unlawful purposes.

  12. C Heglar
    Sep 09 - 5:41 pm

    I agree with alot of the other comment that where made. I dont think that the full benefit of EHR may not proven for at least 10 to 20 years.

  13. R MacKenzie
    Sep 18 - 7:36 pm

    Having worked in the hospital system in Canada with and without similar systems, I believe the multiple headaches created by implementation is well worth it in the long run.

  14. Site
    Jul 31 - 12:35 pm

    Health care privacy is a big issue. If digital medical records can ensure that privacy is a priority,I think it’s a win-win for everybody.

Leave a Reply


Mobile Theme